3/14 John please tell us how to open up an account outside of US, preferably
an account in which you can have US as a permanent address and one that
has a decent interest-rate to inflation ratio, like the UK pound or
Australian $, thanks.
\_ I have no idea about interest rates--continental European rates
for bank accounts tend to be pretty abysmal, but you'd drop cash
into a fund located in a disinterested country through a bank.
Go to an outfit you like, such as http://www.llb.li (great service)
and open an account. If you can't, there are notary services that
will do it for you. I have no idea about Jersey/Monaco/Caymans and
how they work, but most banks geared towards foreign clients tend
to offer mail holding services for a small fee. Regarding
Australian $, Vanuatu had a lot of offshore account type activity
last time I was there (~2 years ago) but at the time the
Australians were trying to crack down on it. That may have been
targeted at .au citizens, though. Most "civilized" banking
countries also subscribe to some sort of money laundering provision
or another; in Switzerland, ~100k CHF transactions are the lower
limit at which they require proof of the provenance of the cash
(i.e. no ill-gotten gains.) If it's a tax dodge, do it in a
country which does not consider it its responsibility to prosecute
foreign income tax evasion (.ch is under massive pressure from the
EU to start doing so.) To get around this, some countries will
charge you an "equivalence tax", i.e. around their approximation
of what you'd be paying in your home country. I'm not a banking
expert, but if you have some specific questions that I can check
out without too much effort, drop me a mail. -John
\_ You know ING Direct yes? ING Direct UK pays 5%, ING Direct Aus
pays 5.2%, and ING Direct Spain pays 6%. I wonder how one could
open accounts with foreign ING Direct.
\_ Also, what is the goal: If its to diversify RISK (eg, of the
dollar dropping into the toilet), then just use foregin index
funds and bond-index funds.
\_ Good point, sorry, I was just assuming tax dodge. -John
\_ tell me if you want pointers to foreign bond (long
and short) fund, foreign reit fund, foreign utility fund,
foreign inflation indexed debt fund.
\_ I am interested in this. -ausman
\_ http://www.smartmoney.com/tradecraft/index.cfm?story=20041122

2/23 Happy Belated Soviet Armed Forces Day! -- !ilyas
\_ Hairy thugs with Stingers >> Soviet armed forces. -John
\_ Don't misunderestimate the forces of Great Mother Russia.
\_ WTF is "misunderestimate"? Guys, use a dictionary,
and English isn't German, you shouldn't string
prefixes like this. You simply had to say
"underestimate" or the opposite "overestimate."
\_ I learned the word from Heil Bush Jr. - op
That's what Heil Hitler did in 1942. Don't become another
\_ "Heil"!="Herr"
6th Army soldier with lice crawling out of your nose, pus
coming out of your wounds, and frozen toes and fingers falling
off when bandages were unwrapped. Keep your sorry sissy arse
for your swiss wench or for some French whores, and stay out
of the eastern front, cause you will end up curled up in a
shit-filled 30 below bunker hole shivering of cold and fright,
crying and whimpering, out of wood and out of food, knowing
that your fuhrer has abandoned you, and knowing that you will
never see yer mama again.
\_ Winning a war due to a combination of aid from your allies
and enemy strategic fuckups doesn't count. -John
\_ It doesn't? I thought that's all pretty much all wars
were won. -jrleek
\_ Tell Napoleon, Mannerheim, Pilsudski, and a host of
other brilliant generals who were simply "better".
Note that "strategic fuckups" != "tactical fuckups".
\_ Zhukov is brilliant too.
\_ Zhukov!
\_ Was, he's dead, and "we have more PPsH-armed
peasants than you have bullets" does not imply
brilliance, although you're probably right.
\_ the war was won by the courage and sacrifice of the
citizens of Great Mother Russia, including teenage
girls from a factory holding up an entire Panzer column
with AA guns when the Germans first attacked.
- RusCom Troll
\_ In 1941, war was beginning.
\_ SU and Stalin probably had more "strategic fuckups" than
the Germans, but they still won due to the heroic Russian
people!
\_ They won because they release all 'Zigs.
\_ The lithium's behind the Advil. Go ahead. I won't miss any.
\_ I thought Nazi's defeat was not due to the Red Army's
strength, but due to Soviet's strategy of burning everything
down to earth before they retreat.
\_ In other words, strategy.
\_ In other words, "ilyasing their country"
\_ "In other words"? Isn't that the same word I used
above? -- PP
\_ You know what you doing.
\_ Was it a mistake for the Allies to ally with USSR against
Germany? Would the world (western world at least) have been
better if we let the Soviets fight the Germans by themselves,
either winning eventually but at much higher cost or losing
eventually?
\_ What if the winner ended up with the Bomb?
\_ Like the Russians did?
\_ We already had the bomb at that point, and the Nazis
were out of the picture.
\_ Somebody set us up the bomb!
\_ So? The winner still ended up with the bomb. Why
should we have allied with USSR?
\_ Germany with the bomb, controlling all of
Europe, would be a much more formidable opponent
than the USSR was. I think it was as simple game
of power politics.
\_ where is ilyas and his funny trolls?
\_ In SOVIET RUSSIA, Ilya trolls YOU!
\_ For great justice.

3/14 My girlfriend has one of those "USB flash drive" "stick like things"
with 128MB ... and it has suddenly become "write" protected, and
nothing can be "written" to it. Looking at "properties" doesn't
seem to offer any "check boxes" that I thought could have caused
the "problem". Anyone "seen" a "problem" like this before?
\_ Most of these things have a physical write-protect switch.
\_ Not on this one.
\_ Does it use a special driver with write-protect ability?
Did your OS mount it read-only?
Do you have write permission?
\_ I borrowed it one day and used it on my home computer
which is win2k ntfs while her laptop is winxp fat.
seems that it has a problem after that. guess I'll
bring it back to my home computer to see if it will
work from there, even don't I don't see why that
would cause a problem in the first place.
\_ Did you properly eject it from the win2k machine? If
not, you probably corrupted the filesystem.
\_ But I can't even format it now.
\_ I've had some problem with a CF card that 'lost' all the pictures,
nearly gave me an heart attack. I got the files back via
"chkdsk /f drive:" Again use with caution.
\_ hey! what's with all the double quotes?! are you trying to be
funny? - op
\_ yes. -quoter
\_ you're failing.

3/14 We have this licenced proprietary C++ library but no source, just
a dynamicaly-linked library and the .h file. We have some C++ code
that calls the library. I'd like to be able to call this closed-source
library from within Java. Since I already know how to call its
functions, can I just use System.loadLibrary("Proprietry"); to access
this library, or do I have to make a seperate C++->Java wrapper using
say JNI?
\_ You have to write some JNI wrappers. There's special code on
both the Java side and the C side to make JNI work. (Unless, of
course, they have some JNI wrappers included. Look for .java or
.class files.) -jrleek
\_ They have no Java wrappers and are out of business. I guess
I know my next project...
\_ Well, first, make sure their libraries were compiled with
the same compiler as your JVM. If it's Sun's JVM on
linux, it's gcc. In order to work with Sun's JVM, the
library needs to have been compiled with gcc, or icc 8.1
or later. Another possibility for an earlier version of
icc is Jrocket. -jrleek
\_ Presuming their libraries are compiled with some old wierd
obsolete compiler, if I make a JNI wrapper (in C++) for
their code and compile it with the right compiler, will I
be able to call my wrapper from Java? Or are we screwed?
\_ You are very likely screwed. Wierd stuff can happen
if your C++ compilers are not binary compatiable.
Although you may get lucky. In my experience
linking gcc compiled JNI with an icc 8.0 library,
everything was cool as long as the library didn't
throw an exception. If an exception was thrown,
everything always crashed. No matter who threw the
exception or from where or who was supposed to
catch it. Java can be touchy. -jrleek
\_ It's even worse. If it's not the same compiler /with
the same options when you compile/ you're probably
out of luck. -emarkp
\_ We have in-house C++ code that calls this old
library just fine when compiled with (I think)
the MSFT compiler. If I compile my JNI wrapper
with the same compiler, shouldn't that also work?
This funky library just sits there processing
input data and never throws exceptions.
\_ If I may make an architectural suggestion,
I believe that you shouldn't be utilizing
JNI to call this library. Instead, I believe
that you should utilize CORBA and write a
wrapper around your library in that fashion.
This is especially relevant if you plan on
utilizing this library in the future. I realize
that this may be a performance hit. Again,
use best judgement given time/performance/etc.
Just a suggestion.
\_ It might work out for you then. I'm pretty
sure the JNI on windows is compiled with
the MSFT compiler. I can't really say
though. I'm niether a C++ or windows
guru. -jrleek
\_ If that works, then, in the worst case, you
should be able to write a pure C wrapper
on the C++ code, compile the wrapper with
VC++, call the C wrapper in your JNI layer
and compile the JNI stuff using another
compiler.

3/14 Hi guys, fyi, there was another protest in Lebanon today, larger than
the 500K protest, and this time, against Syria. Like earlier protests,
mostly composed of young people. Considering Lebanon only has 4
million people, I wonder whether it's 75%+ of people our age and
younger who decided to get out of the house and protest for/against.
\_ Yes, and the first rally was likely composed mostly of Iranians.
\_ Are you saying that the pro-Syria protest had a large number of
people bussed from Syria / the West Bank?
\_ That's what I read from the news. Of course this was American
news that I was reading, so. -- !PP
\_ Maybe some of the protesters attended both rallies because they were
paid by both sides to do so.
\_ Protester of the day
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/050314/481/xhm10503141604
\_ I never knew foreign women were so beautiful. I guess Lebanon
isn't such a bad country after all!
\_ 1: Big waist.
\_ that may be so, but she still has a smaller waist than
our typical Patriotic Jenny Craig-type of women.
European women >>> American women. Less McD fat, less
bovine/poultry-hormones, less pesticide, less pollution,
and less attitude.
2: With that collar she's wearing, it looks more like she's
posing for Playboy.
\-Beirut's reputation/image before ~1980 and since are
very different. It used to be quite a party city.--psb
\_ It still is, or rather is again. I think it has
one of the fastest-growing club/bar scenes around
the world. -John

3/14 Why Mormons shouldn't move to UK:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4341693.stm
\_ What the hell does any of that have to do with mormonism? Or even
religion at all? Huh?
\_ Hi troll! -emarkp (I had more Physics and Math than just about
anyone else I knew in the CS major.)
\_ yes, and the war in Iraq is the right decision, and Bush is
right, and everyone who thinks otherwise will go to hell.
\_ Woohoo! You win the stupidest troll of the day award!
\_ I don't think that's possible, given the guy below. -tom
\_ I assume you mean those 2 in the gay marriage
thread? Yeah, I wrote this before those were
posted. Maybe we need to take a vote.
\_ Tom's a fag, he's obviously biased.
\_ Wow, didn't know the "rightness" of the war in Iraq was
scientifically measurable. And no, I don't make pronouncments
about a person's eternal soul based on their politics.
about a person's eternal progression based on their politics.
Oh and sign your name. -emarkp
\_ I'd rather be a mormon than a fag.
\_ is that because you are mormon?
\_ You misspelled "moron"
\_ Why, exactly? And why have you given this thought?
\_ Well, I'll just throw gasoline on the troll fire and comment
that the two aren't mutually exclusive. -emarkp
\_ Uh oh. I don't think your metaphors are rowing with a
full deck of marbles.

3/14 The argument for gay marriage is that it's their own business and
doesn't affect anyone else, since its private matter between
two grown up adults and they have the rights to choose how
they live. But why does the argument breaks down for other
things that both party agrees to, like marriage/sex with a
minor, hiring someone to kill myself (doctor, give me the
death pill)? It seems if we allow gay marriage, then we should
not ban other types of marriage as well, as long as both party
are ok with it, such as multiple marriages, father/daughter,
mother/son, brothers/sisters, humans and animals, etc. Any
thoughts? Just because gay people are on TV doesn't make it
more 'right' than any of the other banned marriage types.
\_ Not to mention the fraud implications of instituting gay
marriage...
\_ uh, what?
\_ uh, think about it?
\_ uh, what?
\_ you can't be that dumb.
\_ Part of marriage is consent, and legally being able to enter into
a contract -- children and animals cannot give consent. Polygamy
is a more grey area but it can be argued that divorce situations
would become too difficult to resolve. The real solution is for
the government to get out of marriage altogether and just issue
civil unions, with only churches being able to marry people. The
civil unions give you all the legal rights marriage does today,
while the churches have the right to grant marriage to only those
they deem fit. And this argument isn't that persuasive anyhow,
for the simple reason that saying "giving rights to group X means
we'll have to give it to group Y" doesn't mean group X shouldn't
get said rights. Does "If we give black people the right to sit
at whites-only lunch counters, that means we'll have to let horses
and sheep in as well" make any sense?
\_ yes you are right, giving various rights to married woman and
man doesn't mean we have to give similar "rights" to garried
man and man.
\_ Except there are very good reasons to let men marry men
and women marry women, just like there are very good reasons
to let black people sit at whites-only lunch counters.
\_ Pray tell, what are these good reasons?
Racial segregation was based on the false
premise that there were "races", whereas
the denial of marriage rights to gays is
not based on any such false premise.
\_ The good reasons are obvious to anyone but a bigoted
moron. Two men or women in a long-term committed
relationship deserve visitation rights, survivorship
rights, etc. -tom
\_ Go man! Thanks for fighting for my right to enter a marriage with
my lovely sister!
\_ Marriage between a man and a woman is the foundation of a
healthy society tested over thousands of years. Other forms
of unions like father daughter, gay men, etc. are not.
Hire a lawyer and draw up your own legal documents if you want,
just don't call it marriage.
\_ Not to mention the inevitable consequences of evolution,
extinction.
\_ Yes, since once gay marriage is legal, hetero marriage will
become illegal -- And the world's population is already
shrinking at an alarming pace.
\_ The world's population is shrinking???
\_ Your sarcasm detector is in need of repair
\_ Your claim about history is simply not true. -tom
\_ Really? Prove it.
\_ How about we say a civil union can be between a man and a woman,
or a couple of the same sex -- all other laws about bigamy and
incest still applying. Then good Christian churches in San
Francisco can call civial unions between gays and lesbians
marriage, and you can retain your right to not call such civil
unions marriage.
\_ A dog is a dog. A cat is a cat. you can try
calling a dog a cat, but it's still a dog and
everyone will think you are an idiot.
\_ your troll-fu is weak!
\_ You do realize not all the rights of a married couple can
be solved with a legal contract don't you? For instance
I can't file my taxes as a married couple (just one of
many examples.) Oh and metal protests to the contrary you
many examples.) Oh and mental protests to the contrary you
a bigot and a homophobe. Have a nice day.
\_ you should ask the question why there should be such
a relationship called marriage that allows two people
to file a joint tax return in the first place.
\_ One of many rights. One of the most obvious because
everyone does taxes every year so they are aware of the
laws. Not everyone has to deal with, say, custody battles
every year. Or medical emergencies. Etc etc. And if
you want to get rid of marriage altogether, well, I
wish you luck. I'm not sure it is a good idea but
if you can make a compelling reason for there to be
no "special couple (or group?)" rights at all, then
by all means convince me. That's another conversation.
\_ what I mean is that there are reasons why we attach
various legal rights and responsibilities to
marriage (the one between a woman and a man).
Those reasons no longer apply when it's
garriage.
\_ joint tax return and partner benefits should be
100% applicable to gay marriage. Why wouldn't they
be? -tom
\_ I don't think you understood what I was saying.
\_ Then perhaps you should explain it better.
All you did was make an assertion. -tom
\_ you're an idiot. -Tom
\_ Genocide, slavery, discrimination, religious persecution, etc.,
have been part of history for thousands of years as well.
\_ you got the "thousands of years" part, but you forgot the
"foundation" part.
\_ That can be argued
\_ Not supporting gay marriage is in no way comparable to
these things. Please tell me how the rights of a gay
man (or woman) have been abridged.
A gay man has the same rights as any other man to marry
any woman he choses. Similarly a gay woman can marry
any man she choses. Gays and non-gays have the same
exact set of rights.
What gays are asking for is EXTRA rights above and
beyond what the average person is entitled to. What
is so special about them that requires that we give
them something which all other people do not have?
It is not as if they are blind or deaf or cripple,
or were formerly treated as chattel. Why should a
person's private choices about their lifestyle
entitle them to EXTRA public rights?
Now if you want to tell me about sex-change people,
then perhaps I can agree that these people may have
less rights.
\_ And when mixed race marriages were illegal everyone
had the exact same rights, they were allowed to
marry someone of the same race. Gee why all the fuss?
\_ The issue of mixed race marriage is wholly
different than that of gay marriage b/c
there is really no such thing as separate
races. To abridge the rights of a person
based on a false characteristic violates
the fundamental principle of equality.
Unless you are willing to claim that gender
is a false characteristic, look elsewhere.
NOTE: I don't care what gay people do w/
their lives and I think that it is wrong
to discriminate in hiring, &c. based on
the fact that a person is gay (or watches
B5 instead of Star Trek).
\_ There is no such thing as separate races? Next thing
you'll tell me is gays are human beings!
\_ There is no such thing as separate races?
Next thing you'll tell me is gays are human
beings!
\_ That there cannot be separate races
is obvious from evolutionary theory
and has been generally confirmed by
genetic studies. There is also no
doubt that gays are human beings.
So what? It leaves unchanged the
idea that the private choices of
some people ought to create some
extra right for them.
\_ I think if the current trend continues, assisted suicide will
eventually become legal. So are polygamy and father/daughter, etc.
if the laws can be modified such that the involved people can sign
declarations like "I hereby declare that I only deserve one third
the right of being the wife to Mr. X" or "We hereby irrevokably
sever our relationship as brother/sister" so as to avoid legal
nightmare. But marriage/sex with a minor or an animal will probably
never pass, since a minor or an animal can't give consent.
\_ you're an idiot. -tom
\_ That's such an insightful comment tom!
\_ It's insightful because it is true
\_ I agree with tom. -!tom
\- Hola, if you are interested in one perspective on the
history of homosexuals in "christendom", you may wish
to read John Boswell of Yale (dead?). He has at least
two books on the subject:
http://csua.org/u/bcshttp://csua.org/u/bct
\_ If a man marries a man and a woman marries a woman, they
will become extinct. If for thousands of years the
foundation has been based on that, human race will be
extinct. It's not the way nature intended it to be. I am
certainly not advocating we kill them all, like we do when
chickens and cows catch a disease, but it is a 'problem'.
It especially sickens me when gay couples wants to adopt a
child. It's like you proudly declares to the world you cut
off your penis, and then wants to surgically install a
penis because you need one. If you want to be gay, don't
fucking complain about not able to have a baby.
\_ you're an idiot. -tom
\_ Should single people be able to adopt?
\_ I hope this is a troll, it would be hard to imagine anyone
being so bigoted in the 21st century. I assume you are against
IVF, viagra, birth control, etc.?
\_ No, only gay that wants to have kids.
\_ Do you have any idea how many kids are abandoned every
year? Fuck you.
\_ And all the sex change shit.
\_ Gay marriage advocates, I want to "union" with my sister (or
maybe brother) with all the rights and responsibilities of
a garriage. However, I want to cut out anything that has
to do with sex with said sister (or brother) cause I am not
interested in their respective sexual organs. What do you
think of that?
\_ I think you're an idiot. -tom
\_ why?
\_ Because you exhibit so much evidence of it?
\_ How come you can redefine marriage and I can't?
What is the basis for marriage?
What is the basis for marriage? Just because
a relationship is consensual, doesn't mean it
should have the rights and obligations of
marriage. Being consensual, alone, is not
enough.
\_ The consensual part was in refence to people
marrying sheep and children.
\_ Why not?
\_ Why not? Why isn't it being consensual enough?
\_ What does being married mean? How is it
different from other types of relationships?
While you can try to define a marriage in legal
terms, ultimately, our laws surrounding
marriage were made to cater to this age old
relationship between a man and a woman which
is the foundation of society. The laws are
for the relationship and not the other way
around. Now, the question is, should the
laws be extended to a gay relationship?
\_ Times change, people change. Slavery
was the foundation of society for thousands
of years. And then it wasn't.
\_ The comparision btwn gay marriage
and slavery is intellectually
dishonest. A slave had virtually
no rights under the law whereas
a gay man or woman enjoys all
rights that every other person
of their gender enjoys.
BTW, slavery was not the basis
of every society for thousands
of years.
\_ And after slavery, blacks had all the
rights of whites--they could still ride
the bus, they just had to sit in the
back. -tom

3/14 http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/03/14/gay.marriage.ap/index.html
California gay-marriage ban ruled unconstitutional (state constitution)
State: "State law also says marriage is a contract between a man and a
woman."
Plaintiffs: ... cited now-overturned bans on marriage by interracial
couples, or laws that treated wives as a husband's property
\_ Why is the constitution so vaguely written!! God damn it.
\_ Does this mean I can finally marry chiapet? Joyyyyyyyy!!!
\_ So, in the plaintiff's argument, were those bans overturned by
the legislature or the courts?
\_ Perez v. Lippold (1948) - Supreme Court of California
"Respondent refuses to issue the certificate and license,
invoking Civil Code section 69, which provides: '* * * no
license may be issued authorizing the marriage of a white
person with a Negro, mulatto, Mongolian or member of the Malay
race.'"
\_ Mongolian or the Malay race? So Chinese was somehow a better
race than Mongolian and Thai better than Malay in the American
eye back in 1948? What caused such discrepancies? -- Chinese
\_ Because Americans in 1948 knew what the opium trade did
to China! -Bud Day
\_ My interpretation:
They meant "Mongoloid" (Chinese, Japanese, Korean,
Filipino, Inuit, etc.).
\- The "keep the races sep" attitude was to be found
among the "educated and respectable" far later than
1948. See the quotes in WARREN''s opinion in
Loving v. Virginia: http://csua.org/u/bcv
In the last 15 yrs there were various southern school
principals getting into hot water over similar. --psb

3/14 I'm thinking about getting a new laptop. I don't want to buy a Dell
because I'm not a Republican supporter and I don't want to buy a Mac
because my work involves Linux development/VMWare. What are other
alternatives I have? Thanks.
\_ If it's for work, why not expense it to your company and get the
most expensive Sony Viao you can get?
\_ Apparently today is "troll the motd" day.
\_ Kinda like "the Troll Olympics" isn't it?
\_ obGetAThinkPad
\_ ob Support the CHICOMS?!? omgwtfbbq
\_ They're still American, better buy quick though.
\_ What is not made in China these days?
\_ I make sweet love to yermom right here in the USA.
\_ My 2-year-old Fujitsu S series is made in Japan.
You'd have to ask a new buyer if you wanted to know
if they were still made there, considering how cheap
one is on http://newegg.com now ($1,250 before tax).
\_ Just not an X31--*nix is a nightmare on it. I'm told X40s are
OK for Linux/BSD though. Be very careful to check the various
Linux-on-laptop sites for compatibility first. -John
\_ Assuming this is not a troll, Dell and IBM are at the top tier
in terms of on-site support. Toshiba's probably right behind.
HP, I dunno, I think they're notebooks look worse than ThinkPads.
HP, I dunno, I think their notebooks look worse than ThinkPads.
My feeling about Sony's is they're more about form than function,
but I could be totally wrong; don't know about their on-site support
\_ I know Gateway Cowbrand can go into Chapter 11 anytime, but anyone
has any experience with their laptops?
\_ I have a Compaq NC6000 for work. Features, speed, ergonomics are
great. Reliability is meh (several of us already have had HDs
replaced for this model).
\_ Have you considered Fujitsu? The lifebook and toughbook series
are pretty nice and very rugged.
\_ I'll second this. The toughbooks are amazing. Look at the W2.
\_ toughbooks are Panasonic
\_ toughbooks are Panasonic. Get the Y2, for ~ .5 pounds more
you get 14" instead of 12" screen.
I see on http://engadget.com on http://cnet.com a couple people complaining
I see on http://engadget.com & http://cnet.com a couple people complaining
the screens suck compared to the Fujitsu S series with
CrystalView.
\_ Apparrently Linus now uses a Mac for his primary work machine so
perhaps Linux support on the Mac will be getting a lot better in
the near future. -dans
\_ Long thread from Aug 2004
http://www.engadget.com/entry/7044941173883695
I like the posts talking about the Fujitsu S7010/S7010D

3/14 In the Gay Marriage post, it doesn't mention this was a ruling by a
county judge. And the article mentions 13 states last year passed
state amendments that banned gay marriage. I thought it was 11. Which
are the 13 states?
\_ Yerright - the judgment was made by a San Francisco Superior Court
judge. It's expected to be appealed all the way to the California
Supreme Court, but until then, gay marriage is nazi'd.

3/14 FYI, don't forget: Gay marriage is legal in Massachusetts.
A gay or lesbian married couple can file jointly for the MA state tax
return, but that same couple can't file jointly for the federal tax
return (Defense of Marriage Act, 1996, signed by Bubba). Also, a gay
or lesbian partner won't have death-of-spouse Social Security benefits,
unlimited marriage gifting, or all the other federal tax/SS benefits.
\_ Do'h! I already forgot. What was that again?
\_ http://tinyurl.com/5ofuh
\_ Dem gays are already gettin' MARRIED!
\_ This gay marriage thing sounds pretty good. If all the gay guys
get married and don't reproduce, w/in a few generations we won't
have any of the buggers around to bother us. Gay women, now that
is another story...
\_ You are more brilliant than the lovechild of Hawking and Einstein
\_ We don't need a few generations, we just need lots of gay
guys and no gay women. Soda brothers, we have hope now!

3/14 If you're bored, you can meander over to http://gamespot.com, click on
Act of War: Direct Action, click on Developer Diary #2 movie, and
watch as French game developers gloat over the tactical nuking of
the White House.

3/14 More evidence of Real Estate Speculation. We are definitely
in bubble land here folks:
http://money.cnn.com/2005/03/14/magazine/flippers_0504/index.htm
\_ great, since you were so accurate predicting the dot-com
bubble, that means we can only expect another 150% increase
before it's time to sell. -tom
\_ eh, you need some major event that affects national psychology:
like gas prices going too high, something getting all blowed up,
deficits finally affecting the economy / all the banks pulling out
of the dollar. Otherwise it will be a slow-motion bubble pop.
-total newb